Login  Join!      Schools/Clubs  Incidents  Safety  Regs     Used-Gear  Events  News      Resources  PPG-Info

NewsRoom,
Home Improvements:

Hero Cam
Aug 24, 2001
Updated Dec 25, 2001

The local newspaper folks saw me flying about the western Chicago suburbs and tracked me down. Their photographer, Jim Svehla, didn't want the normal ground-to-air shots; he wanted wide angle shots of the pilot from four feet away in flight.

So we came up with an idea, inspired by the Hamilton's work with video cameras and Eric Dufour's performance in at least one commercial video, to mount the camera on a construction extending about 4 feet away from the pilot.

The first incarnation was built from angle-iron and was too heavy. By the time a 3 pound camera and 2 pound mount was added at a four foot arm it pulled too much to the right. The first attempt at getting airborne resulted in the camera pole dragging the turf and causing a ground loop. Fortunately damage was minor but it became obvious the offset weight was too much.

The solution was to use aluminum square stock, built with an angle and reinforcement along with having a counterweight to balance the camera. Fortunately it worked.

Launching the contraption certainly increases the difficulty because of the added rotational inertia and camera-on-a-stick way out the side. At first a reverse inflation was tried but the winds died enough to prevent kiting the resulting reverse-n-run almost dragged the camera again. That was abandoned in favor of a forward.

It turns out the forward inflation, even with a stiff wind (it picked up after setting up for the forward) is preferable. Even if blown back a few feet it is much easier. Of course if the wind is enough to actually kite the wing without moving then the reverse would still be better...just be careful on the turn-around: Once you get this whole thing swinging, it wants to keep on going!

Using a forward inflation the launch was essentially no different than any other. Attention had to be paid to not drag the camera however. 

The photographer had provided an RF based remote which I carried in my left hand and was instructed to shoot all 36 shots before landing. That was no problem! After the first roll was shot, I landed and did another roll.

The pictures appeared in the Oct 10, 2001 edition of the Naperville sun and they came out great. The cover shot was taken from the ground and shows the camera mount well (click on the thumbnail to see sufficient detail). It was slightly grainy but that's to be expected of a picture blown up to that size.

The shot to the left was the newspaper's "pick of the litter". It wound up being used for the centerfold and so consumed the entire left and right sides with the article text placed on top.

The shot is over the Prairie preserve near Naperville, IL.

There were actually a number of pictures that didn't come out clear enough due to vibration. When viewed as a 3x5 they looked fine but when brought up to newspaper size they weren't in perfect focus. At certain RPMs a harmonic vibration sets up and the camera shakes a fair amount. It's difficult to see looking at it, but the photographer noted it when he looked through the camera during runup.

On several of the shots I had reduced the rpm just to avoid vibration (the prop windmills). 

It was fun taking on the project and the results were spectacular. Be forewarned though, launching this contraption certainly increases the things that can go wrong so be careful.

All Contents Copyright © 2007 USPPA